Throughout history and in our modern society, women are supposed to be: thin, silent, chipper, happy, pale, dressed modestly but not too modestly, sexy but not too sexy, young, reserved, sane, able-bodied, fertile, mothering, selfless, humble, restrained, and, above all, white. She has to be a She, she has to be cis, she has to wear makeup and dresses, skirts; she cannot under any circumstances be described as smelly, loud, brash, dark, or crude. She cannot wrinkle, she cannot stink, she cannot cause a scene. A woman is always religious, a woman is always married or seeking to be married, a mother or hoping to be a mother. To stray from this path is to become weird. While I personally do not believe that any act that subverts the status quo makes one queer, I do think it makes you weird. There’s an honor to that, to stepping outside of the very thin, very pale line set by mainstream culture. To exist as one’s truest, boldest self, to exist as a human being with warts and farts and smells, to be unusual and to react with the madness, the anger that this world we live in inspires is brave. It is weird to be brave, and it is brave to be weird.
THIS IS HOW YOU DO IT!
“Spine Corset” by Shaun Leane for Alexander McQueen, SS ‘98.
Khreshchatyk at night, Kiev (Kyiv), Ukrainian SSR, 1979 (photo by Mykola Kozlovskyi)
What troubles me most is the phenomenon of individuals—many of whom have previously shown no interest in politics—suddenly coming to realize that every aspect of life is inherently political, simply by virtue of being part of a society, the polis. Some are only now engaging because the privileges they once passively enjoyed have eroded, compelling them to confront a reality they could previously afford to ignore.
Yet instead of critically examining the systems that led to this shift, many break from their prior political nihilism or cynicism only to adopt a centrist, “third-way” neoliberal perspective. This stance, typical of post-postmodern white liberalism, reflects a detachment rooted in both ideological comfort and historical disengagement.
It is, at its core, an escapist response—a refusal to confront the consequences of their previous apathy and inaction. They enter the political arena not as informed participants, but as confused actors in a game they never bothered to learn. And when they do engage, they often align with the very forces that perpetuate harm, lacking the critical knowledge necessary to make ethical or informed decisions.
i think a big part of the current wave of antifeminist rhetoric among women is that people just cannot accept the idea that liberating yourself is uncomfortable. like of course it feels Wrong to see something you've internalised as normal/necessary (like wearing makeup 24/7) be challenged, that's because you've internalised it. and it will feel ostracising to go against the status quo once you question the things you've internalised. but the discomfort is part of it. you have to move past the fear response and look at the bigger picture.